Department of Anesthesiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Resuscitation. 2010 Sep;81(9):1161-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.05.005. Epub 2010 Jun 17.
We sought to compare the ability of novice operators to provide artificial ventilation using a standard facemask and a new ergonomically designed facemask. Whether or not proper technique was used was also assessed.
Thirty-two allied-health students used both masks in random crossover fashion to ventilate an airway trainer. Breaths were delivered by a mechanical ventilator and exhaled tidal volume was recorded for each of 12 breaths for each participant for each mask. The effect of each mask during ventilation over time was assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA. Assessment of mask technique among participants and association between mask type and hand repositioning were analyzed using the Wilcoxon-Rank Sum Test and McNemar's paired proportions test, respectively.
The tidal volume achieved when participants used the ergonomic mask was higher than when participants used the standard mask by the fourth breath (361+/-104 mL vs. 264+/-163 mL; Bonferroni adjusted p-value=0.040) and increased over time. The repeated-measures ANOVA showed that the ergonomic mask consistently resulted in higher tidal volumes than the standard mask regardless of rescuer's gender. Over time the standard mask resulted in a linear decrease in tidal volume of -10 mL/breath (estimated difference in decay of 10 mL/breath versus the ergonomic mask; p<0.001).
Novice airway operators were better able to provide facemask ventilation using an ergonomically designed mask than with a traditional facemask. We conclude that better hand position facilitating improved mask seal and less operator fatigue account for our findings.
我们旨在比较新手操作者使用标准面罩和新的符合人体工程学设计的面罩进行人工通气的能力。还评估了是否使用了正确的技术。
32 名辅助医疗专业学生以随机交叉方式使用两种口罩为气道训练器通气。通过机械呼吸机进行呼吸，为每位参与者的每只口罩记录 12 次呼吸中的每次呼吸的呼气潮气量。使用重复测量方差分析评估每个面罩在通气过程中的时间影响。使用 Wilcoxon-Rank Sum 检验和 McNemar 的配对比例检验分别分析参与者之间的口罩技术评估和口罩类型与手部重新定位之间的关联。
参与者使用符合人体工程学的口罩时达到的潮气量在第四次呼吸时高于使用标准口罩时（361+/-104 mL 与 264+/-163 mL；Bonferroni 调整后的 p 值=0.040），并且随着时间的推移而增加。重复测量方差分析表明，无论救援人员的性别如何，符合人体工程学的口罩始终比标准口罩产生更高的潮气量。随着时间的推移，标准口罩导致潮气量线性下降 -10 mL/呼吸（与符合人体工程学的口罩相比，估计下降 10 毫升/呼吸的差异；p<0.001）。
新手气道操作者使用符合人体工程学设计的面罩进行面罩通气的能力优于传统面罩。我们的结论是，更好的手部位置有助于改善口罩密封和减少操作人员疲劳，这解释了我们的发现。
